• @hglman@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1011 months ago

    I am a big proponet of blckchains, but speculative nfts have no purpose. Using a blockchain to establish who authored tome work, thats a an actual use.

    • @echo64@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2811 months ago

      we already have that feature in our society, without nfts or blockchain. it’s worked for hundreds of years

      • Spiracle
        link
        fedilink
        311 months ago

        Blockchains are public ledgers of information. It’s neat. It can be a practical way to keep a ledger. Apparently some banks use a blockchain to validate transactions now.

        It’s the whole hype about how it would change the world, and the incredible amounts of grifting that poison Blockchain for the public. For far too many people, it’s just another get-rich-quick scheme.

        • @echo64@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1411 months ago

          you can have a public ledger of information without blockchain, we’ve done that for thousands of years in far more efficient ways.

          • Spiracle
            link
            fedilink
            211 months ago

            Sure we can do without. We have done without many things for “thousands of years”. I seriously doubt that it was more efficient in all circumstances.

            The claim of public ledgers having been more efficient for that long is so absurd to me that I’m doubting whether you are serious.

        • Dr. Dabbles
          link
          fedilink
          English
          311 months ago

          Block chains do not need to be, and most real applications are not, public. Signing signed work has existed for decades, and almost every single use of it is in a private application.

      • @hglman@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        011 months ago

        Copyright isn’t the same, but moreover, it’s not that it didn’t exist. It’s that blockchains remove a class of failures that exist in centralized beauracracy.

        • @echo64@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          511 months ago

          and replace those well-known, well-understood, workable failures accounted for by decades/centuries of law, with a brand new class of failures! and hurt the environment as a fun side effect

          • @hglman@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -511 months ago

            Yes, never change, never do new stuff. Also, human bureaucracy uses more energy than proof of stake systems.

            • @echo64@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              611 months ago

              An important part of changing and doing new stuff is recognizing how the change impacts the wider space. Just changing and disrupting things for the sake of change is likely ignoring all the details that went into the original system. Often, those details aren’t even understood or known at the time, but someone 70 years ago encountered a situation, put a system in place, and it worked ever since.

              The past 15 years of big tech disruption of existing systems is a good example of this. We changed so much about so many institutions, and so so much of it turned out to be for the worse.

              • @Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                511 months ago

                During the pandemic I had a few friends that endured severe mental health problems due to the fact their GPU’s died in the middle of the height of bitcoin bullshit. One couldn’t do their job, and neither could socialize through the games we typically loved to play together. They became further isolated during a time of physical isolation.

                Ever since then I’ve been completely against bitcoin. I understand they allegedly made the process less GPU heavy now, but I won’t forget that human suffering took place for literally no good reason other than a pyramid scheme preying upon ignorant and stupid people.

                So yeah, fuck crypto. People need to find another way to do that shit.

        • Dr. Dabbles
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 months ago

          I’m not a block chain defender in any sense, but you don’t have to do the idiotic proof of work crap to make block chains actually usable. You and I can sign something with a key, for instance. And the signing of signed data creates the “chain”. No worthless CPU usage, no idiotic “proof of…”. You know it’s my key, I know it’s your key, we know the order of signing. Done.

          All the hype nonsense was just grifters trying to steal money. And crypto currency has absolutely no purpose whatsoever.

    • gloog
      link
      fedilink
      2511 months ago

      How does it establish who authored a work? The only thing the blockchain can be guaranteed to prove is who first registered it on said chain, which absolutely doesn’t necessarily mean the author. Immutability doesn’t do anything to solve the garbage in garbage out problem.

    • @SlopppyEngineer@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      011 months ago

      It might be useful for artists to register all their work so grabby AI companies can’t just use it as training data because it has digital ownership.